IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

T.J. Sherman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-09-27 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2011-12 St. Louis Bandits NAHL 52 1 13 14 0.269 0.1067 0.1074 0.2826 0.2845
2012-13 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 58 6 20 26 0.448 0.1776 0.1699 0.4707 0.4502
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2016-17 Trinity D3 NESCAC SR 27 1 6 7 0.259
2015-16 Trinity D3 NESCAC JR 28 3 12 15 0.536
2014-15 Trinity D3 NESCAC SO 26 0 6 6 0.231
2013-14 Trinity D3 NESCAC FR 24 2 7 9 0.375
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2013-14 · Trinity
+174.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10810
Defenseman overall
#1390
Defenseman born in 1992
#3839
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Walker Hamilton
Framingham State · 2016-17
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mitchell Dolter
St. Olaf · 2017-18
0.292 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Cory Harder
St. Norbert · 2006-07
0.438 Average
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.